Tourism in Marine Environments, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 73–77 1544-273X/15 $60.00 + .00 Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3727/154427315X14398263718510 Copyright © 2015 Cognizant, LLC. E-ISSN 2169-0197 www.cognizantcommunication.com RESEARCH NOTE WHALE WATCHING IN NORWAY CAUGHT BETWEEN MORE TRADITIONAL HUNTING CANONS AND THE LUCRATIVE PROMISE OF SEISMIC AIRGUNS GIOVANNA BERTELLA* AND HEIKE IRIS VESTER†‡§ *School of Business and Economics, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway †Georg-August University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany ‡Max Planck Institute for Dynamics and Self-Organization, Göttingen, Germany §Faculty of Aquaculture and Biosciences, University of Nordland, Bodø, Norway This research note concerns the role of whale-watching tourism providers in the debate over protec- tion of the marine environment. The case reported is about northern Norwegian whale-watching organizations. Based on the analysis of local newspapers and on the direct experience of one member of our research team, this research note concludes that the whale-watching companies, and more in general the wildlife tourism companies, engage only marginally in the debate. This can be explained referring to the companies’ limited availability of resources and experience in the field, and to the existence of different perspectives relative to the way humans can use and impact the marine environ- ment and its inhabitants. Key words: Whale watching; Environmental protection; Sustainability Introduction an attractive economic activity, and, in some cases, as a good alternative to whaling (Cunningham, The aim of this Research Note is to reflect on the Huijbens, & Wearing, 2012; Hoyt & Hvenegaard, role of whale-watching tourism providers as active 2002; Higham & Lusseau, 2008; Kuo, Chen, & participants in the debate over protection of the McAleer, 2012; Neves, 2010; Parsons & Draheim, marine environment. 2009). Whale-watching tourism has often been pre- Recently, several scholars from various disci- sented by academicians and environmentalists as plines have problematized the beneficial aspect and Address correspondence to Giovanna Bertella, School of Business and Economics, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, NO-9037, Tromsø, Norway. E-mail: [email protected] 73 74 BERTELLA AND VESTER the sustainability of tourism, with some attention also the country, close to the area where whale watching paid to whale watching (Fennel & Weaver, 2005; occurs. Loud explosions caused by seismic airguns Higham, Bejeder, & Williams, 2014; Moscardo & are used to search for oil and gas, which can cause Murphy, 2014; Scarpaci & Parsons, 2014). They physical damage and behavioral changes leading to raise the question of whether whale-watching tour- reduction of survival success for marine mammals ism can live up to expectations in terms of its poten- (Weilgart, 2013). These events add a new dimen- tial and beneficial effects. sion to the debate around the use of the marine Although recognizing the importance of discourse environment for human activities, and have led to and trends at the macrolevel, this article focuses on reactions from locals, as shown by the spontane- the local level, viewing local discourse and actions ous street manifestations against seismic investi- as main drivers of the development and practice gations that took place in Andfjorden in fall 2014 of whale-watching tourism (Lawrence & Phillips, (Wilhelmine Revheim, 2014). 2004). This article investigates which role the northern Method Adopted in the Empirical Investigation Norwegian whale-watching organizations play in the protection of the marine environment and its The secondary data sources are: the main news- inhabitants. This issue has acquired particular rele- paper of northern Norway (Nordlys), the regional vance since the first marine oil and gas exploitation section of the main Norwegian news channel (NRK surveys in whale-watching areas began in 2007. Nordnytt), and two local newspapers relative to Based on the assumption that in critical moments the area where whale watching has traditionally the role played by involved actors emerges more occurred (Lofotposten, Vesterålen Online). The online clearly, this study investigates the debate around versions of these information sources from the year these recent events. 2014 (January–October) were analyzed. In order to identify the most discussed topics, attention was paid to the amount of posts that the articles had A Brief Presentation of Whale received by the readers. The search words used to Watching in Northern Norway collect the data were relative to oil and gas exploi- Since its beginning in 1988, whale-watching tations and whales, and also to fisheries as the tra- tourism in northern Norway has operated in a tur- ditional economic activity dependent on the marine bulent context. Norway is among the few countries environment. that do not follow the 1986 International Whaling In total 144 articles were collected (see Table 2). Commission ban. In northern Norway, a marked Each article was categorized with respect to the main cultural resistance against adopting the global view topic, being: a) oil and gas exploitation, b) the local of whales as animals to be protected and not hunted presence of whales, or c) both. For each category the has been reported (Kalland, 1993; Ris, 1993). main themes were identified, together with the men- Although these reports date back to the beginning tioned actors. Eight articles had received numerous of the 1990s, today the same resistance can also be online comments by the readers (see Table 3). The noted. An illustration of the local position on whal- posts of these articles were also analyzed focusing ing is an episode from July 2014, when a regional on content and tone. online newspaper reported a public transport boat’s Additional data come from first-person experience observation of people suspected to be related to the of one of our research team. This person is a biologist Sea Shepherd Conservation Society (Nikolaisen, and manager of a nonprofit local organization con- 2014). Online readers’ comments show the strong cerning whale research and education and conducting emotional reaction to this episode by some local whale-watching tourism from 2006 to 2011. people who seem to fear antiwhaling actions and declare readiness to counteract, sometimes with the Findings use of violence. In 2014, extensive oil and gas exploration surveys Table 1 shows a list of the whale-watching compa- were conducted farther along the northern coast of nies. It also includes companies that organize other WHALE WATCHING IN NORWAY 75 Table 1 Whale-Watching and Wildlife-Watching Companies, Research and Education Organizations in Northern Norway Whale-Watching Wildlife-Watching Companies Companies Nonprofit Organizations Whalesafari Andenes: Rib Lofoten: rib boat Ocean Sounds (founded boat tours, education, sea eagles safaris in 2005 as a research research and tourism company; NGO since 2014): education, whale research (acoustics) Sea Safari Andenes: rib Lofoten Explorer: Marefa: wildlife walks, boat tours, wildlife rib boat sea eagles education, research boat safaris safaris Lofoten Opplevelser: rib boat sea eagles safaris Puffin Safari: rib boat puffin and sea eagles safaris Stø Safari: rib boat sea and seal safaris Lofoten Charterboat: rib boat sea eagles safaris marine-life safaris and the whale-related research As shown in Table 2 (see topic Whales and the and education organizations in northern Norway. relative main themes and actors), there is no univo- The data from the press are significant for the cal way by the locals to view the whales. Whales are understanding of the view of whales held by locals, seen as prey, food, and a tourist attraction, appreci- and the identification of those especially active in ated also by the locals who, in some cases, seem to discussions of recent oil and gas exploitation and recognize the individuality of specific animals and the marine environment—particularly the local care about their welfare. presence of whales. Table 2 summarizes the find- Considering the total amount of articles (144), the ings in relation to these aspects. issue of the effects of oil and gas exploitation and Table 2 The Main Topics, Themes, and Actors Discussed and Mentioned in the Articles No. of Main Topic Articles Main Themes Main Actors Oil and gas 87 Opportunities (especially in terms Local and national politicians, local municipalities, of local jobs), skepticism and Norwegian Oil and Gas Association, Norwegian critics (concerning the natural Petroleum Directorate, Statoil, Eni, Geology environment and fisheries) Governmental Agency, Institute of Marine Research, University of Bergen, Directorate of Fisheries, Norwegian Fishermans Association, Local nonprofit association against oil, Bellona, Greenpeace Whales 50 Tourism resources, whaling and Whalesafari Andenes, local community, Ocean food, amenity for the locals, Sounds interest and care shown towards individual animals Oil and gas + 7 Possible negative effects of seismic Whalesafari Andenes, Marefa, Ocean Sounds whales to whales 76 BERTELLA AND VESTER the whales has a marginal role (7 articles, see the on the competence of the specific researchers and topic Oil and gas + whales in Table 2) but, simulta- the research environment in general are raised. neously, seems to be the most discussed (6 articles, Although not directly involved in the debate on see the most commented topics in Table 3). the newspapers,